Official Foreign Policy Relations - March Set -

[Rassputtin]

YOu know I have almost everything from wow and nation wars, calcs, attack arrays and formulas, conversations, strategies, suggestions previously made, algorithms to suggestions, guides, etc etc etc.

A few things I'd like to point out. Not sure how many of you remember Jameswheel but he was pretty good at netting. First one to my knowledge to go a set without ever being grabbed. At any rate, going through my stuff i came across a msn convo with him in which we were discussing indy strat specifically. Its from June of 2003. Those were the days when I would get suicided on by Calvin And Chris and the like in little one man suicide nations if my state was anywhere near the top 5. Which is another tale. So this particular set I was suicided and I believe James was well on his way to going hitless again, but another nation.... decided to "war" his nation even though he had worked out prior arrangements with said nation to not be hit... anyway. I asked him what ratio's he was running BEFORE the war broke out.

Rass says:
ok, so for example, what was your unit percentages before you got screwed
Rass says:
like 50% inf
Patrick(4 and 2) says:
i tihnk i was
Patrick(4 and 2) says:
35% inf
Patrick(4 and 2) says:
and umm
Patrick(4 and 2) says:
3% spies
Patrick(4 and 2) says:
35% ships
Patrick(4 and 2) says:
12% AGM
Patrick(4 and 2) says:
15% tanks


Its a vastly larger conversation but.. as you can see. There was a time when infantry hoarding was not the norm for netting. When players with skill at the game and at negotiating ran balanced states not because [DEAD] would hit them but because everyone and anyone would/could war at any moment. Diplomacy was required then. And you ran a balanced state in constant fear that the diplomacy would break down and you would be prepared....... So please quit with the "lessons" on netting as a response to infantry hoarding like the concept is foreign.

The fact of the matter is hoarders are defenseless, running a lazy strat, and have no fear of retribution for thier arrogance in running a defenseless state. Be that as it may they are entitled to play how they like and run thier state the way they see fit.

Of course so am I, which will consist of me "war" attacking any defenseless states I see. This includes at the end of the set. It has nothing to do with who you are, what nation your in or whether we get along on the forums or not.

I just bought another premium so I'll be seeing if I can get some freinds to join me for atleast the next three months.

[kanman]

Does it hurt you that players infantry horde? You can net or war. If you want to net, go heavier on infantry. If you want to war, then war. I don't see why you have to try to net and upgrade like your gonna war, fall behind in netting and then war the netters.

Rare suicides and occasional wars should be the incentive to be balanced, there doesn't need to be a nation with a policy every round to war infantry hoarders.

[totte]

it is a rather diffrent game these days with so few active members.... in 2003 it was quite a diffrent story

[Rassputtin]

Does it hurt you that players infantry horde? You can net or war. If you want to net, go heavier on infantry. If you want to war, then war. I don't see why you have to try to net and upgrade like your gonna war, fall behind in netting and then war the netters.

Rare suicides and occasional wars should be the incentive to be balanced, there doesn't need to be a nation with a policy every round to war infantry hoarders.

It does hurt me, I don't run a defenseless all infantry state, therefore am incapable of grabbbbing states my size and states smaller than me. Thereby causing defeats and loss of cash and limiting further an already short list of targets for lg. So it affects me. Neither you or anyone else has to net and upgrade like they may war. In short you(everyone not you particularly) don't have to respect my mindset anymore than I have to respect yours. I see no reason why defenseless states should finish ahead of me if I can with exceptional ease prevent it. Ya'll try to get to the top using only infantry and I'm gonna try to get to the top by bombarding those infantry with ships......

I guess it's just different strats for different folks you know.

[Rassputtin]

it is a rather diffrent game these days with so few active members.... in 2003 it was quite a diffrent story

indeed master totte but in reality the game at this member size is whatever the communtity chooses to make it. Currently the community accepts defenseless infantry hoarders as the norm, if a thousand players joined tomorrow it would be much harder for individuals such as myself to do what is being done to change what is acceptable. Quite frankly I don't want to allow infantry hoarding to be one of the founding principles the game is built on.. Do you?

[Hoebawt]

if 1k players joined tomorrow.. you wont see any top states inf hording... Totte is right... it def has to do with the size of the community why there are so many inf horders...

[Rassputtin]

Your right, if it happened overnight it would be enough chaos to prevent it. But if players just gradually meandered in, in increasing amounts over the next several months, they would all in turn see/learn/be taught and employ the current methods...

With this member count the game is what the community makes of it.

[Rassputtin]

FYI - I'm not in Grim [DEAD].

[MAGGIO]

i think ras has a point

if a state doesnt have spies and gets stomped on then we say "you should have had spies" and that is extremely acceptable in this crowd so why doesnt the same ring true for inf hoarders.

also i think ras is going to keep trying to prove his points about the flaws in the game.

undercutters should be kept in check and so should food hoarders but thats a different conversation.

[kanman]

It does hurt me, I don't run a defenseless all infantry state, therefore am incapable of grabbbbing states my size and states smaller than me. Thereby causing defeats and loss of cash and limiting further an already short list of targets for lg. So it affects me. Neither you or anyone else has to net and upgrade like they may war. In short you(everyone not you particularly) don't have to respect my mindset anymore than I have to respect yours. I see no reason why defenseless states should finish ahead of me if I can with exceptional ease prevent it. Ya'll try to get to the top using only infantry and I'm gonna try to get to the top by bombarding those infantry with ships......

I guess it's just different strats for different folks you know.

Since you're more balanced, shouldn't you be able to intel and not have defeats.

But anyway, you say it's a way of getting to the top but it's not. Any nation worth anything will retal or kill you for your aa's.

I haven't seen anyone try to define infantry hoarding and it's hard to define since it changes through the round. And with varying competition, sometimes it's going to take longer for the top state to be able to safely upgrade. What is going to happen is that there will always be states who break your infantry hoarding rules and if they're your friends you'll let it slide and if they're not your going to aa them.

As others have noted, states are less balanced now because there are less suicides, etc. I don't see the point of artificially forcing more balance. If you want to net, you can have a purely netting competition heavy on infantry and as you said, most likely no one will suicide you for that. If you want to war then war but netting with aa's doesn't work.